Chemists’ work autonomy

I then engage in an examination of the interaction between normative and descriptive aspects in my research in the philosophy of chemistry and suggest that what began as normative work on the nature of atomic orbitals, for example, eventually turned into descriptive work. That is I concede that chemists use orbitals in a manner that is distinct from that of physicists and furthermore that they are fully entitled to do so in the light of the degree of autonomy which chemistry enjoys from fundamental physics. 

If we look at Eric Scerri s approach to the question of reductionism, we see that he not only rejects hard reductionism, which aims to explain all chemical phenomena in terms of quantum mechanics, but also the fallback soft position that posits an ontological dependence without demanding reduction at the level of explanation. Instead, he proposes a third option that consists in defending the autonomy of chemistry by proclaiming that the debate involves different levels of reality that are autonomous though interconnected . In particular, he emphasizes the difference between the orbitals as they are used by chemists and those dealt with by physicists working in quantum theory. Indeed, Scerri maintains that chemistry teachers should specify that the orbitals that they are talking about are not those of modern quantum mechanics. Nevertheless, it is probable that this... 

---